Why do people only notice the BAD points of your video?

[Arigatomina]

The point I was making is that there is no single argument. Maybe when you're on the high school debate team and you're lacking in experience and knowledge it's okay, but when you argue or debate against something like me you should fully expect to be doing it on multiple adpating levels and you should have enough sense and understanding to see WHERE those arguments evolve, HOW they evolved, and WHAT they evolved from. If you can't do that, just don't bother, cause I'm not interested in kickin it with teh high school debate team, I'm interested in a highly complex debate made up of arguments within arguments that can change and adapt after every post. I am not linear, I do not think in terms of right and wrong, my postions, ideals, thoughts and opinions can change just easily as I can change my shirt. If participating in a discussion like that isn't something you can handle, I would suggest you find another thread.

My high school didn't have a debate team. ^_^

Anyway, since you're now arguing about the effect of time on the quality perceived in an artwork, you should probably shift the thread to 'General Off-Topic.' This forum is for the discussion of amvs.

In your first posts, the reason many people started 'arguing' with you to begin with, you said that when it comes to amvs, only those which took a long time to make are good. You weren't talking about the 'test of time' when you wrote that. The people arguing with you weren't talking about the 'test of time.' The problem here is that people are arguing with something you - as you noted - have already left behind.

You're now talking about another topic, and that is fine. But it seems many of the people arguing with you are only doing it because of your first statements. Address those statements and the discussion can have a conclusion. Keep shifting the argument to different fields and genres and it never ends - the lack of definitive end you mentioned to Savia. And again, that's fine. But make sure your oppponents know what you're arguing before you go on and on and on talking to yourself and changing your 'topic' so you never have to address points.

I brought up the problem with quality versus time and what did you do? You said the topic wasn't about that - it was about the 'test of time' and whether or not perceived quality survives that test. In which case, I have no argument with you.

Now, if you want to talk about your original statement - the one that so many people disagreed with, I'd love to discuss that. But as long as you shift the topic every time someone replies, there's no point in it.

[paizuri]

Ah, now I get it! Hatter is trying to hone his skills here to defeat his local high school debate team! It must gall him that he has continued to be unsuccessful in his quest to best them.

[Onideus_Mad_Hatter]

My high school didn't have a debate team. ^_^

Neither did mine actually.

Anyway, since you're now arguing about the effect of time on the quality perceived in an artwork, you should probably shift the thread to 'General Off-Topic.' This forum is for the discussion of amvs.

*shakes head*

I think maybe you didn't quite understand what I meant by nonlinear. I didn't mean so much that the topic keeps changing, I meant that it evolves from one form to another but it is all still in RELATION to the original points.

In your first posts, the reason many people started 'arguing' with you to begin with, you said that when it comes to amvs, only those which took a long time to make are good.

I said no such thing at all. Originally my post was directed at the originator of the thread, who was whining about the "rewards" of creating AMVs. I NEVER said that only good AMVs are those that took the longest to make. I said that THE WORK of CREATING the AMV was the true reward and thus, thosw who spent a lot of time creating their AMVs got more out of it than those who didn't.

Then LATER in the thread, AD somehow misinterpreted what I had said, got all defensive, and started raving on about how their video was in the top star rating and that time is not always a prerequisite for quality.

AD is the one who first went off topic, not me. I was talking about the REWARDS of AMV making, nothing more. Then AFTER AD went off topic, I found flaws in their argument and then started debating them. AD said that time was not always a prerequisite for quality, and in some cases I might even agree with that...had they not used their own AMV (which I found to be seriously lacking) as an example of such.

[AbsoluteDestiny]

All I did was react to how you disregarded the creator's video purely because he stated that it took him 8 days to make. It was narrow-minded and childish.

The rest of your thread you did on your own. I'll think you'll find that it is you who are overly defensive of people attacking your statements.


I do find it incredibly ironic, however, that amidst a thread entitled "Why do people only notice the BAD points of your video?" you reviewed a video and did exactly that. Every "good" point was qualified by a "maybe" or an "ok"

At least it answered the topic of the thread: people only notice the bad because they are too egocentric and self-centred to do anything but negatively criticise.

[Onideus_Mad_Hatter]

All I did was react to how you disregarded the creator's video purely because he stated that it took him 8 days to make. It was narrow-minded and childish.

Actually what you did was read the first 2 lines of my post and then you just jumped the gun without even reading the rest.

The rest of your thread you did on your own. I'll think you'll find that it is you who are overly defensive of people attacking your statements.

You confuse being overly defensive with getting vexed at inherent stupidity that won't take the time to THINK and READ the whole post BEFORE replying. YOU did not read my original post very well AD, had you actually done so, you probably would not have replied at all in regards to it. You just read the first couple lines and suddenly yer subconsious screamed, "OOOooo, ARGUMENT!"

I do find it incredibly ironic, however, that amidst a thread entitled "Why do people only notice the BAD points of your video?" you reviewed a video and did exactly that. Every "good" point was qualified by a "maybe" or an "ok"

And I find it incredibly ironic that you replied in regards to my first post without actually reading or even attempting to understand all that stuff I wrote about how the WORK in and of itself was the TRUE REWARD. I was laughing at the originator of the thread not because I thought his work was slop for not spending weeks on end working on it, fuck I didn't even LOOK at his AMV. I was making fun of him because he thought that star ratings and opinions were the reward in making AMVs, when in fact the true reward comes from creating the AMV in the first place. And the reason that people like me get so much more "rewards" out of it, is because we understand that fact and thus, we put in the maximum amount of effort and TIME that we can.

At least it answered the topic of the thread: people only notice the bad because they are too egocentric and self-centred to do anything but negatively criticise.

You can try and justify my opinion about your AMV any way you like, Deary, but it doesn't change the fact that just like the originator of this thread...you don't understand what the true rewards in AMV making are. You just don't get it. *shrugs* Quite frankly, I pity you.

[AbsoluteDestiny]

I did read it, but I was NOT replying to that. It was the insulting *snicker* you made that I was referring to, not your theory on the work is the pleasure.

The rest of your argument was irrelevant next to the idea that if you dont spend your life on something then it's obviously crap, which you then attempted to defend for several pages.

[AbsoluteDestiny]

you don't understand what the true rewards in AMV making are. You just don't get it. *shrugs* Quite frankly, I pity you.

Ah, forgot to reply to that.

Um... right.

I make them because I really really HATE it and I'm a sado masocist.


As it happens I tend to think the result is the reward. I like all my videos irrespective of the amount of time I spent on them.

(oh yeah, and I also make them because I get paid for them. Again the result is the reward )

[Arigatomina]

I said no such thing at all. Originally my post was directed at the originator of the thread, who was whining about the "rewards" of creating AMVs. I NEVER said that only good AMVs are those that took the longest to make. I said that THE WORK of CREATING the AMV was the true reward and thus, thosw who spent a lot of time creating their AMVs got more out of it than those who didn't.

So you did. ^_^ You laughed at a person who said he spent 8 or so days making a vid and proposed the notion that those who spend months (like yourself) are better. You never came out and said it in that first post, so I shouldn't have said you did. You said it later in that 'time does equate to quality' post. Which you now blame on AD. ^_^;;

Then LATER in the thread, AD somehow misinterpreted what I had said, got all defensive, and started raving on about how their video was in the top star rating and that time is not always a prerequisite for quality.

After which you proposed your 'time does equate to quality' argument saying that even anime takes forever to make, and nothing good was ever done in a day (can tell you're not christian ;p ) - calling for people to give examples of one 'art' piece that was done in a short amount of time.

That's where you took AD's statement (something pertaining to AMVs and the discussion going on - amvs being the key here - check the forum title) and turned it into a 'test of time' art discussion. I feel very simple now. ^_^; Savia caught it immediately.

If you want to move the topic of consideration to historically celebrated art, then you are no longer relevant to the original AMV discussion.

The 'discussion' should have ended there. Instead, you drew it out further and further off-base. Even if it was based on a misinterpretation of what you said, you *did* realize you'd been misinterpreted and drew it out for no other reason than to encite argument. So what this means is the last 4 pages of this thread are meaningless - nothing here has anything to do with amvs or whether or not those done in 8 days are better or worse than those done in a month.

Great, nice work there. Savia should get a medal for being the 'quickest on the uptake'. I'm wasting my time with you now. I never wanted to discuss this whole 'test of time' and 'great artwork' theory of yours.

The reason most people here posted was because you mocked someone who didn't spend as much time as you did on a vid. All the detours you've taken since then clouded the entire problem.

But you know...the discussion about how quality is determined by whether or not an artwork survives the test of time is a moot one now. Earlier you said, and I paraphrase "name me one art work that was made in a short amount of time and is now celebrated for having retained its quality." And someone gave forth Picasso and his quickly made but still acclaimed artwork as that one example. So, you've been given the counterproof you called for. Even that discussion has been closed.

[Onideus_Mad_Hatter]

I did read it, but I was NOT replying to that.

So what did you ADD kick in and you just convienently left out the rest? Filled in all the gaps with your imagination?

It was the insulting *snicker* you made that I was referring to, not your theory on the work is the pleasure.

...amazing isn't it, folks? AD now openly admits to taking what I said out of context and then trying to attack me based on it...huh, fancy that. There's a fancy word for that, AD, it's called making straw men.

The rest of your argument was irrelevant next to the idea that if<SLAP>

It was ALL in relation to itself, the entire post was of a single coherent train of thought. YOU took part of it OUT OF CONTEXT in order to try and suit your own FAILING positions that had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING I actually said.

[AbsoluteDestiny]

It may have been out of context but that doesn't mean that you didn't BITE... HARD... and revealed that it was *exactly* what you were thinking with that comment.